Case Summary: Bhagwan Gupta & Ors. v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Ors., W.P.(C) 13715/2023, Delhi High Court (10.11.2023)
Category: Search & Seizure – Release of Seized Currency | Sections Involved: Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017
Facts of the Case (with Para References)
In the petition before the Delhi High Court, the assessees challenged the continued retention of Indian currency amounting to ₹58,00,000 seized from the residential premises of Petitioner No.1 during a search conducted under Section 67 of the CGST Act on 29.07.2021 (para 2) .
The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus compelling the GST authorities to release the cash contending that the seizure and its prolonged retention lacked statutory backing and violated their property rights (para 1) .
Questions/Issues Raised (with Para References)
The principal issue before the Court was:
-
Whether the GST authorities were justified in retaining ₹58 lakh of seized currency under Section 67 in the absence of any continuing investigation or statutory bar, particularly when the issue already stood covered by binding precedent (para 3) .
Court’s Observations (with Para References)
The Division Bench noted that the issue was squarely covered by its earlier judgment in Deepak Khandelwal, Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr., 2023:DHC:5823-DB (para 3) .
The Court recorded the statement of the Revenue counsel that the seized currency would be released within ten days, making further adjudication unnecessary (para 4) .
The Court also clarified that such release would not preclude the Department from taking any action for statutory violations in accordance with law (para 6) .
Judgment / Final Order (with Para References)
The High Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of the Revenue’s unequivocal statement that the ₹58 lakh seized during the Section 67 search would be released within ten days (para 4, 5) .
The Court’s liberty clause ensured that the Department retained its right to initiate or continue proceedings for statutory violations (para 6) .
Case Law Referred & Summary Table
| Case Referred | Citation | Court’s Verdict / Ratio |
|---|---|---|
| Deepak Khandelwal, Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr. | 2023:DHC:5823-DB | Currency seized under Section 67 cannot be indefinitely retained; release must be ordered when retention lacks statutory support and investigation does not justify continued custody. |
Between the Fine Lines – Practical Takeaways for Trade & Industry
The decision demonstrates that currency seized during GST searches cannot be withheld indefinitely unless the Department substantiates its necessity under Section 67. Assessees may legitimately seek release when the investigation is complete or the seizure lacks continuing legal backing. By affirming its earlier precedent, the Court signals that GST authorities must act with procedural discipline, ensuring that seizure powers remain proportionate and not coercive.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
